Background: Corneal cross-linking treatment is the unique treatment method that can cease the progression of keratoconus disease. Because of the long duration of conventional treatment, accelerated cross-linking treatment methods are being developed. Aims: To compare two different accelerated corneal cross-linking protocols in terms of postoperative visual acuity and topographic findings (higher-order aberrations and keratometry values). Study Design: Retrospective comparative study. Methods: Sixty-five eyes of 43 patients (30 men and 13 women) who underwent two different accelerated corneal cross-linking protocols (10 min, 9 mW/cm 2 and 5 min, 18 mW/cm 2) for progressive keratoconus were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the accelerated corneal cross-linking treatment protocol: group 1 (10 min, 9 mW/cm 2 , 32 eyes of 21 patients) and group 2 (5 min, 18 mW/cm 2 , 33 eyes of 22 patients). Uncorrected visual acuity and best-corrected visual acuity values and topographic findings (central corneal thickness and flat and steep keratometry values) were recorded preoperatively and 6 months after corneal cross-linking treatment. High-order aberration values measured with Pentacam preoperatively and 6 months after corneal cross-linking were also recorded. Results: In both groups, a significant improvement was detected in the uncorrected visual acuity and best-corrected visual acuity levels preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively (group 1: p=0.001, p=0.001 and group 2: p=0.001, p=0.001, respectively). In addition, central corneal thickness values decreased significantly in both groups (p=0.006 and 0.001). Trefoil values showed no significant difference preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively in group 1 (p=0.160 and 0.620, respectively). In groups 1 and 2, coma values were found to decrease significantly in the 6 th postoperative month compared with preoperative values (p=0.001 and 0.020, respectively). There was no significant difference between preoperative and 6 th month postoperative horizontal and vertical trefoil values in both groups (p=0.850 and 0.140, respectively). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of preoperative and 6 th month postoperative higher-order aberrations, refractive errors, keratometry values, and uncorrected visual acuity and best-corrected visual acuity levels. Conclusion: Both accelerated corneal cross-linking procedures provide similar improvement in topographic findings, coma values and visual acuity.
Purpose: To compare choroidal thickness (CT) and ocular pulse amplitude (OPA) in childhood obesity with insulin resistance (IR) and without IR. Methods: Seventy-three childhood obesity and 62 healthy children, who were both age-matched and gender-matched, comprised the study population in this prospective study. Obesity was determined as having a body mass index (BMI) – standard deviation (SD) score that was > 2 SD. Intraocular pressure (IOP) and OPA were measured using a dynamic contour tonometer. The CT measurements were performed using enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography at three locations, comprising at the fovea, at a position 500 µm nasal, and also at a position 500 µm temporal to the fovea. Results: Mean BMI value was 28.72 ± 4.85 in the patients with childhood obesity and 21.47 ± 1.14 in the control group. The mean IOP and OPA values were determined 15.90 ± 2.30 and 14.10 ± 2.16 mm Hg, 1.50 ± 0.28 and 1.74 ± 0.32 mm Hg in the patients with childhood obesity and the control group, respectively ( p < 0.001, p < 0.001). The mean subfoveal CT value was 350.50 ± 81.51 μm in the eyes with childhood obesity and 390.02 ± 71.50 μm in those of the control group ( p = 0.003). When the patient groups with and without IR were compared, no significant difference was found between CT, OPA and IOP values ( p > 0.005). Conclusions: Our results showed that both OPA and CT values were significantly decreased in childhood obesity patients. We suggest further studies to verify longitudinal changes in OPA and CT, as also the evaluation of these parameters in other populations.
Background The aim of the study was to assess retinal microcirculation in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) through the use of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) and compare the results with those obtained in healthy controls.
Methods The study enrolled 39 patients who had fully recovered from COVID-19 and 40 healthy controls. OCT-A image acquisitions were obtained using AngioVue software (version 2017.1.0.151) and the RTVue XR Avanti imaging system (Optovue Inc., Fremont, CA, USA). Nonflow area in the superficial capillary plexus (SCP), foveal avascular zone (FAZ) area in the whole retinal vasculature, FAZ perimeter, acircularity index of FAZ, and foveal density were automatically obtained with the FAZ assessment tool. Vessel density (VD) at the SCP and deep capillary plexus were also measured.
Results Compared to the control group, the nonflow area and the FAZ area in the whole retina was greater in the COVID-19 group; however no statistically significant difference was observed (p > 0.05 respectively). As for vessel densities, all superficial parafoveal VD parameters were considerably higher in the COVID-19 group compared to the control group (p < 0.05 respectively). Despite the fact that the vessel densities in the remaining zones were lower in the COVID-19 group, those differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05 respectively).
Conclusion VD at the parafoveal area of the SCP was significantly higher among patients in the late post-recovery period of COVID-19 disease compared to healthy controls. These findings show the impact of COVID-19 on the retinal microvasculature and its possible role as a risk factor for the development of ocular diseases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.